Fascinating request Vince, thanks for raising it - I'd be interested to see how Arches handles this use case as well. It's a common heritage issue - either competing or equally valid interpretations of a given artefact or site based on the (always) limited evidence that archaeology provides. From my recording experience (way back when) a typical problem might be that aerial photography has identified a site as a crop-mark, but we don't have any dating evidence (so in the U.K. it could date from anywhere between say 4000 BCE or 2000 CE). It could be an IRON AGE / DEFENDED ENCLOSURE, or it could equally be a MID TWENTIETH CENTURY / ANTI AIRCRAFT BATTERY (a rather extreme example, but possible). For a user coming to that record, it would be helpful to have insight into which authority had suggested which interpretation.
Ed On Wednesday, January 11, 2017 at 10:41:41 PM UTC, Vincent Meijer wrote: > Hi all, > > > I am working on an idea I have to record all interpretations made > regarding a specific (heritage) resource. > > I would like to *relate the assignment* of e.g. a cultural period or the > use/type of an object (hide scraper, spear head, vase) or an object > category (defensive structures, tools, jewelry) *to an authority*. > > This authority can be an actor or a (to be created) academic reference, > both resource graph types, rather than values in a regular > dropdown/authority document. > > > I want this in particular because it is easier for my users to create a > new resource than it is to add values to dropdowns via RDM. Also it seems > to me that using the type of search queries CIDOC encourages (find > unexpected relationships) would work better this way. > > > I came up with the following addition to HERITAGE_RESOURCE.E18 (new nodes > are the ones sticking out in the top) for > HERITAGE_RESOURCE_USE_TYPE_ASSIGNMENT.E17: > > (ASSIGNMENT_AUTHORITY.E39 would hold a foreign key to the related > resource.) > > (Full res: > https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5r8wxmmppbQNTdGczg3cXZMLTg/view ) > > <https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5r8wxmmppbQNTdGczg3cXZMLTg/view> > > > > My question is: has anybody done this type of relations before or has an > idea how to do it? > Arches is currently written to have only relations between two complete > resources, not between a node of a resource and a complete resource. > I get the feeling I should override the create_resource_relationship() > function in Arches' resource.py, but perhaps I'm looking at it the wrong > way. > > Thank you in advance for any suggestions, > > Vincent > -- -- To post, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected]. For more information, visit https://groups.google.com/d/forum/archesproject?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Arches Project" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
